IRC log of soap-jms on 2008-06-24

Timestamps are in UTC.

15:58:02 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #soap-jms
15:58:02 [RRSAgent]
logging to
15:58:33 [RolandMerrick]
RolandMerrick has changed the topic to:
15:58:59 [RolandMerrick]
Zakim, list
15:58:59 [Zakim]
I see SW_RIF()11:00AM, SW_HCLS(Bio-Ont WG)11:00AM, SW_SWD()11:00AM, WS_SOAP-JM()12:00PM, INC_RWAB()11:00AM active
15:59:01 [Zakim]
also scheduled at this time are SW_DAWG()10:30AM, MWI_TSWG()11:00AM, WAI_PFWG()11:30AM, XML_QueryWG()3:00AM, SW_HCLS(Chairs)12:00PM, XML_XSLWG()3:00AM, WS_SAWSDL()12:00PM,
15:59:03 [Zakim]
... XML_SMLWG()3:00AM, VB_VBWG()10:00AM
15:59:13 [RolandMerrick]
Zakim, this will be SOAP-JM
15:59:13 [Zakim]
ok, RolandMerrick, I see WS_SOAP-JM()12:00PM already started
15:59:15 [Yves]
trackbot, start telcon
15:59:17 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs public
15:59:19 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be SJMS
15:59:19 [Zakim]
ok, trackbot; I see WS_SOAP-JM()12:00PM scheduled to start in 1 minute
15:59:20 [trackbot]
Meeting: SOAP-JMS Binding Working Group Teleconference
15:59:20 [trackbot]
Date: 24 June 2008
16:00:54 [RolandMerrick]
16:01:15 [Roland]
Roland has joined #soap-jms
16:01:34 [Roland]
Chair: Roland
16:01:59 [Roland]
rrsagent, make minutes
16:01:59 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate Roland
16:02:09 [Roland]
rrsagent, make log public
16:03:22 [Phil]
Roland, FYI... I will miss the 7/8 call due to vacation
16:04:58 [Roland]
Zakim, aaaa is Roland
16:04:58 [Zakim]
+Roland; got it
16:05:10 [Roland]
Zakim, IBM is Phil
16:05:10 [Zakim]
+Phil; got it
16:06:08 [Zakim]
16:06:36 [Roland]
Zakim, TIBCO is Eric
16:06:36 [Zakim]
+Eric; got it
16:07:03 [eric]
eric has joined #soap-jms
16:08:09 [Roland]
Regrets: Peter
16:09:43 [Zakim]
+ +1.919.742.aabb
16:10:37 [alewis]
alewis has joined #soap-jms
16:10:39 [Zakim]
+ +0196270aacc
16:10:43 [Roland]
Zakim, aabb is alewis
16:10:43 [Zakim]
+alewis; got it
16:11:54 [Zakim]
16:11:58 [markphillips]
markphillips has joined #soap-jms
16:12:07 [Roland]
Zakim, aacc is markphillips
16:12:07 [Zakim]
+markphillips; got it
16:12:19 [Roland]
Zakim, Sun is Bhakti
16:12:19 [Zakim]
+Bhakti; got it
16:12:56 [Roland]
Scribe: markphillips
16:13:00 [Yves]
Scribe: Mark
16:13:07 [Yves]
Scribenick: markphillips
16:13:21 [markphillips]
chair: Roland
16:13:50 [markphillips]
TOPIC: Testing
16:14:15 [Roland]
16:15:14 [markphillips]
Amy sent the above testing summary to the list
16:19:14 [markphillips]
- two approaches to test framework
16:19:17 [markphillips]
- "opposite side" where we implement the sending or receiving partner of a message exchange
16:19:41 [markphillips]
- or an SPI layer which intecepts requests and validates them
16:21:14 [markphillips]
There is no agreement on this - other that to say that the way applications interact with JAX-RPX is out of scope of the tests
16:21:34 [markphillips]
16:23:48 [markphillips]
Alternatively we could require that the vendors provide some way to dump the messages
16:24:07 [markphillips]
There is more agreement on how messages are validated (with Relax-NG)
16:24:44 [markphillips]
- this seems a useful place to start because all paths agree on this
16:25:48 [alewis]
maybe we should build on this?
16:25:49 [alewis]
16:26:20 [markphillips]
The inputs into the test are the URI parameters, the WSDL parameters, and the Message content
16:26:33 [Yves]
well, the easiest, the best, as the tests are here...
16:28:38 [markphillips]
Mark: have we covered testing the message exchange patterns WRT sequence of messages ?
16:29:00 [alewis]
yves: it tests assertions in soap. that won't necessarily test assertions in soap/jms. so we would at least be required to supplement the tests; we could take that set of tests as a starting point, or a foundation, perhaps.
16:29:15 [markphillips]
Eric: One way is easy - the message arrives or not. For req-resp we have to write tests for both sides of the exchange.
16:29:26 [Yves]
yes, I meant that it's already a base for parts of what we want to tests
16:29:40 [markphillips]
Roland: We have to check that the correct JMS headers arrive.
16:30:26 [markphillips]
Phil: Don't forget that the message is not necessarily just a SOAP envelope - may contain attachments
16:30:50 [markphillips]
TOPIC: Review of the Specification
16:30:58 [Roland]
16:31:08 [markphillips]
Peter suggested a number of changes at the above message
16:31:25 [markphillips]
Eric captured Peter's work and augmented it
16:32:35 [bhakti]
bhakti has joined #soap-jms
16:32:50 [markphillips]
TOPIC: Content Questions
16:32:59 [Roland]
Section 1.1: Do we want to specify actual JMS calls? While we don't want to make the specific calls mandatory, we could require the equivalent.
16:34:35 [markphillips]
Eric: We could define *a* way but not *the* way - if we do this it should not be normative
16:36:05 [markphillips]
...and we should do it using the API because there is no standard model for processing below the JMS API
16:41:46 [markphillips]
Section 2.2.2 and 2.2.3 would be the right place to put an example of how to use the API.
16:42:41 [markphillips]
e.g. "message.setJMSDeliveryMode(DeliveryMode.PERSISTENT);"
16:45:10 [markphillips]
Phil: This would involve a lot of duplication for the generic (string properties etc.) It would not be too bad for the JMS message header properties (like DeliveryMode above)
16:46:03 [markphillips]
Action: Phil to write a proposal of the text that should appear in each section of the spec.
16:46:03 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-12 - Write a proposal of the text that should appear in each section of the spec. [on Phil Adams - due 2008-07-01].
16:46:07 [Roland];%20charset=utf-8#introduction-background
16:46:54 [markphillips]
Section 1.5: What do we really mean by "MUST fully support the JMS IRI [sic] scheme"? That is, should we should we spell out "support" in this context? (If I recall correctly, I take blame for the weak wording here - sorry.)
16:47:31 [Roland]
now 1.6;%20charset=utf-8#introduction-conformance
16:48:23 [markphillips]
Eric: We don't say what we mean. Does every "MUST" in the URI scheme equate to something which MUST be supported in the binding spec?
16:49:31 [markphillips]
Action: Eric to investigate and fix where necessary
16:49:32 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-13 - Investigate and fix where necessary [on Eric Johnson - due 2008-07-01].
16:49:45 [Roland]
Section 2.2.2: Do we mandate that property "replyToName" is only used for a two-way MEP?
16:50:35 [markphillips]
s/Investigate/Investigate abiguity about "MUST fully support the JMS IRI"
16:51:24 [markphillips]
Roland: in 2.6 it should say you MUST use it and in 2.7 it should say you MUST NOT use it
16:52:11 [markphillips]
Action: Roland to add text to say in sction 2.6 you MUST use replyToName and in 2.7 it should say you MUST NOT use it
16:52:11 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-14 - Add text to say in sction 2.6 you MUST use replyToName and in 2.7 it should say you MUST NOT use it [on Roland Merrick - due 2008-07-01].
16:53:47 [markphillips]
Phil: That will enforce it at runtime, but is it an error to use replyToName in the URI or WSDL for a one-way MEP?
16:55:29 [markphillips]
TOPIC: Face-to-face meeting
16:55:57 [markphillips]
Roland: Does anyone have any views on the value of a F2F to scope testing?
16:56:29 [markphillips]
Eric: For testing it will be implementation focussed and that should be months away
16:56:45 [markphillips]
Roland: Agreed - we would not do this before September
16:56:46 [Yves]
roland, see
16:57:31 [markphillips]
Roland: We should continue discussion on the spec updates via the mailing list
16:58:21 [Zakim]
16:58:23 [Zakim]
16:58:24 [Zakim]
16:58:24 [Zakim]
16:58:25 [Zakim]
16:58:27 [Zakim]
16:58:31 [Zakim]
16:58:33 [Zakim]
WS_SOAP-JM()12:00PM has ended
16:58:35 [Zakim]
Attendees were +0138687aaaa, Yves, Roland, Phil, Eric, +1.919.742.aabb, +0196270aacc, alewis, markphillips, Bhakti
16:58:40 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate Yves
16:59:19 [markphillips]
ACTION-13 = Investigate abiguity about "MUST fully support the JMS IRI" and fix where necessary
16:59:31 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate Yves
16:59:59 [markphillips]
ACTION-12 = Write a proposal of the JMS API text that should appear in each section of the spec.
17:09:25 [Roland]
Roland has left #soap-jms
18:37:54 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #soap-jms